Vadodara: The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (SCDRC) observed in a recent order that the postal department was also liable after its agent cheated several investors in deposit schemes in Godhra.SCDRC was approached by Chandu Parmar and his wife Champa after they lost Rs 6,22,410 to a fraud allegedly carried out by a postal department agent, Rajesh Trivedi. The total that investors in various savings schemes lost stood at Rs 5.22 crore.Parmar had saved for his retirement by investing in postal term deposits with his wife as joint holder. Deposits with interest amounted to Rs 6.22 lakh. Parmar wanted to deposit Rs 6 lakh in a monthly income scheme (MIS).Trivedi took up the work and collected forms and documents from the couple, but did not give them a passbook. When the scam came to light, Parmar sought the passbook from the post office in Godhra, but was not given one and eventually got a copy of the ledger of his account.The ledger revealed that between Aug 6, 2011, and March 14, 2012, Rs 6.22 lakh was withdrawn from his account. Besides Rs 6 lakh of the MIS account, an additional Rs 22,410 was withdrawn. In his plea in the Panchmahal district consumer forum, the couple argued that the postal department was also responsible for his loss. The forum turned down Parmar’s plea and he appealed in SCDRC.The respondents that included senior post department officials argued that the money was withdrawn by the couple. It was also stated that there was no deficiency of services on the part of the postal department. The respondents also argued that a criminal case was being heard regarding the matter and hence it could not be taken up under the Consumer Protection Act.The commission observed that earlier too pleas in the matter were decided in favour of consumers by it and the national commission. Before Parmar’s matter, SCDRC heard 27 appeals filed by either victims or the postal department. Both sides had been approaching SCDRC as the district forum had given orders for or against them over the years.SCDRC concluded that when an agent took money from an investor for the MIS or misappropriated it by not depositing the money, the post office was also responsible. The order points out that the appellants knew Trivedi because he was a postal agent and had no other relation with him that would have led to them handing over the money to Trivedi.While opening the account, the signatures of both account holders were taken. When it was closed, only one signature was there. This, according to the commission, amounted to deficiency in services. It ordered that the Rs 6.22 lakh that the couple lost should be paid back with 7% interest. It also granted Rs 10,000 towards expenses and an equal sum for mental agony they faced.Jaintun Patel, who represented several victims of the fraud, said that some more appeals were pending in the state commission. “The department has been appealing consistently in all cases even if the amount is small,” he said.
